Attack of Fortified Places. Including Siege-works, Mining, and Demolitions.: Prepared for the use of the Cadets of the United States Military Academy — John Shaqi
Attack of Fortified Places. Including Siege-works, Mining, and Demolitions.: Prepared for the use of the Cadets of the United States Military AcademyMercur, James
History
Attack of Fortified Places. Including Siege-works, Mining, and Demolitions.: Prepared for the use of the Cadets of the United States Military Academy
Mercur, James
Defensive (Military science); Military engineering; Offensive (Military science); Siege warfare
At Belfort the investing force was at first but 10,000 and the line of
investment 25 miles long, giving but 400 men to the mile. This force
was subsequently increased to 20,000 men, and when the besieging army
had all arrived, to 32,000 men.
At Paris (1870) the line of investment was about 3 miles from the
line of the forts, and about 53 miles in length, the investing force
180,000, giving a mean of about 2 men to the yard. The distribution
was, however, about 4 to the yard on the left bank and 1⅓ on the right
bank of the Seine.
At Plevna the line of investment was 2¾ miles from the forts, its
length 43½ miles, the investing force 100,000 men, about 1¼ men to the
yard.
In each of these sieges the place finally fell under the attack of a
force, in no case equal to 2½ times the garrison; but inferences drawn
from this fact are apt to be erroneous, since none of these places
was well fortified according to modern methods, well garrisoned, well
supplied, and defended to extremity.
The results show, however, that under similar circumstances, which are
apt to arise in any modern war, the attack of a strong place which can
be completely invested by a force of two or three times the strength
of the garrison, may promise success; which seems to be assured if
the defence allows the besieging force to complete the investment and
thoroughly intrench itself.
On the other hand, tactical considerations would indicate that a
well-equipped army, of good morale, under an active and aggressive
commander, covered by a modern intrenched camp, should be able to
prevent the investment; and by taking advantage of its interior lines,
its heavy guns and its strong _points d’appui_, should be able to beat
in detail a force very much greater than itself whose fractions, by
reason of the extent of the line of investment, are necessarily not
within supporting distance of each other.
These advantages of the defence evidently disappear, as above
indicated, when the attack is allowed to complete its fortifications,
since under their cover a small force can check even a determined
sortie until a sufficient force to beat it can be concentrated.
From these considerations it is evident that an investment, once
completed, may be maintained by a force less than that necessary to
establish it in the first place (see Investment of Plevna, Pierron,
Méthodes de Guerre Vol. III, pp. 647 _et seq._).
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account